On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 09:58, Julien Rouhaud <rjuju...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 5:32 AM David Rowley > <david.row...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > > 1. Adding a new field to RangeTblEntry to indicate the operation type > > that's being performed on the relation; or > > 2. Adding a Bitmapset field to PlannerGlobal that sets the rtable > > indexes of RangeTblEntry items that belong to DELETEs and ignore these > > when setting resultRelids in finalize_lockmodes(). > > > > For #2, the only place I can see to do this is > > add_rtes_to_flat_rtable(), which would require either passing the > > PlannerInfo into the function, or at least its parse's commandType. > > > > I don't really like either, but don't have any other ideas at the moment. > > But we would still need the same lock level upgrade logic on indexes > for cases like CTE with a mix of INSERT, UPDATE and DELETE on the same > relation I think. #1 seems like a better solution to me.
I think I'd rather find some way to do it that didn't denormalise the parse nodes like that. It seems very strange to have a CmdType in the Query struct, and then another set of them in RangeTblEntry. Besides bloating the size of the RangeTblEntry struct a bit, it also could lead to inconsistency bugs where the two CmdTypes differ, for some reason. -- David Rowley http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
